From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C5AF9481D7; Mon, 12 Feb 2024 22:05:14 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1707775516; cv=none; b=l2iLXM4u0P6R8IrQffxInmtrErWRGTmN2TG8fTQ85mGhUy5moQS0WgY23jxXud04Em9ke4lqaIztx9S8VCuJPhSV+nPnyD+0GhoGt6ys2ROiH3lITdQ699foj0i4NJvGjNbakRnYf/rm8oy0Vs6hHo3jFZrkTgdMlKMan6ibeHE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1707775516; c=relaxed/simple; bh=2RLRDPhu3sgf3BDJLN3IMc0/kUDRPZfmsdCW2qjmaAE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=eZA95dFsaqQVaE7SP88KvRe6IvD42RFzCRHA1IGZ8aG+9bKOKcJArAYvmwyBs6hixJyUQOUmWRFM/bUeOd4bu5p5PVgD0EwHRPDQLI8r3HFYFYPFr4qKwLN6m+RULofnrSyGxoT9VCK9hWYGTsdUDbBpSpuU70bUWO0zq7XN3Z0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=eap62WKl; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="eap62WKl" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1707775515; x=1739311515; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=2RLRDPhu3sgf3BDJLN3IMc0/kUDRPZfmsdCW2qjmaAE=; b=eap62WKlW15MTim66z3vB3XdRvDBZx6xyn8UkgzeZbd6lg7pKeqOwIWR 8g0ke+8PTmOxBT7SVt44LtVLXeZqXkBzSEMmJcaa2/mJ47VZbYOksr4Vc xHpA4uqThk6k5YfQzHnmdElPDwCaq8imucKBC6Bvhu8+b6gih3mze6xpl NJfxtS/vWi8CkRqi/h9Ha2nP26C4+fH0ltVEzZR516ATxTWCFnbIzGcz+ t5OZ6eG8EK3rFjglamzPRSnw5Ryj1qPDsrbM/NIIwR4kcr64t+sHDxPC8 /DpypXQJkRbLq8tgVipZq2ovlVt8F3CQOCl46rfg51tavd3W0KixAQz/4 g==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10982"; a="1897542" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.06,155,1705392000"; d="scan'208";a="1897542" Received: from fmviesa002.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.142]) by orvoesa110.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 12 Feb 2024 14:05:13 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.06,155,1705392000"; d="scan'208";a="25902072" Received: from agluck-desk3.sc.intel.com (HELO agluck-desk3) ([172.25.222.74]) by fmviesa002-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 12 Feb 2024 14:05:11 -0800 Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2024 14:05:10 -0800 From: Tony Luck To: Reinette Chatre Cc: "babu.moger@amd.com" , "Yu, Fenghua" , Peter Newman , Jonathan Corbet , Shuah Khan , "x86@kernel.org" , Shaopeng Tan , James Morse , Jamie Iles , Randy Dunlap , Drew Fustini , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" , "patches@lists.linux.dev" Subject: Re: [PATCH v15-RFC 0/8] Add support for Sub-NUMA cluster (SNC) systems Message-ID: References: <20240126223837.21835-1-tony.luck@intel.com> <20240130222034.37181-1-tony.luck@intel.com> <91bd281e-e21f-4b60-9e73-2f14fcbec316@amd.com> <642f81da-669b-4057-8b97-2894dd57842b@intel.com> <16a63923-2fd2-4d44-a8a3-32d8d6eeee9e@intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <16a63923-2fd2-4d44-a8a3-32d8d6eeee9e@intel.com> On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 01:43:56PM -0800, Reinette Chatre wrote: > Hi Tony, > > On 2/12/2024 11:57 AM, Luck, Tony wrote: > >>> To be honest, I like this series more than the previous series. I always > >>> thought RDT_RESOURCE_L3_MON should have been a separate resource by itself. > >> > >> Would you prefer that your "Reviewed-by" tag be removed from the > >> previous series? > > > > I'm thinking that I could continue splitting things and break "struct rdt_resource" into > > separate "ctrl" and "mon" structures. Then we'd have a clean split from top to bottom. > > It is not obvious what you mean with "continue splitting things". Are you > speaking about "continue splitting from v14" or "continue splitting from v15-RFC"? I'm speaking of some future potential changes. Not proposing to do this now. > I think that any solution needs to consider what makes sense for resctrl > as a whole instead of how to support SNC with smallest patch possible. I am officially abandoning my v15-RFC patches. I wasn't clear enough in my e-mail earlier today. https://lore.kernel.org/all/SJ1PR11MB608378D1304224D9E8A9016FFC482@SJ1PR11MB6083.namprd11.prod.outlook.com/ > > There should not be any changes that makes resctrl harder to understand > and maintain, as exemplified by confusion introduced by a simple thing as > resource name choice [1]. > > > > > Doing that would get rid of the rdt_resources_all[] array. Replacing with individual > > rdt_hw_ctrl_resource and rdt_hw_mon_resource declarations for each feature. > > > > Features found on a system would be added to a list of ctrl or list of mon resources. > > Could you please elaborate what is architecturally wrong with v14 and how this > new proposal addresses that? There is nothing architecturally wrong with v14. I thought it was more complex than it needed to be. You have convinced me that my v15-RFC series, while simpler, is not a reasonable path for long-term resctrl maintainability. > > Reinette > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/ZcZyqs5hnQqZ5ZV0@agluck-desk3/ -Tony